2026 Championship of 21 clubs

[Griff]

2 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Just little things like only 1 or 2 match's per month

season started on 23/Feb. and ends on 7/Sept prior to play offs - During this we will only have 18 matches [9 home games] - during this period we will have had 11 blank weeks, ELEVEN blank weeks THEREFORE almost 3 months of blank weeks.

How many of those were down to Cornwall dropping out, bye weeks set when there were 11 teams in the comp or the team failing to win cup ties ?

[jamescolin]

I would go back to the good old days of one league. The Lancashire clubs played each other and the Yorkshire clubs played each other home and away. Then each county played 4 teams from the other county the fixtures based on the relative league positions. Other teams not from the counties were placed in either one or the other, equal standing as much as possible. Then a top eight play off. We also had Yorkshire V Lancashire as a fixture. The Challenge Cup was played in by all teams the fixtures being drawn.  Income was increased for clubs who needed money. OK I know it was long ago but it gave each team a chance to progress .

[Griff]

4 minutes ago, jamescolin said:

I would go back to the good old days of one league. The Lancashire clubs played each other and the Yorkshire clubs played each other home and away. Then each county played 4 teams from the other county the fixtures based on the relative league positions. Other teams not from the counties were placed in either one or the other, equal standing as much as possible. Then a top eight play off. We also had Yorkshire V Lancashire as a fixture. The Challenge Cup was played in by all teams the fixtures being drawn.  Income was increased for clubs who needed money. OK I know it was long ago but it gave each team a chance to progress .

Don't think we ever had an eight team play-off in the one division days.

It was four until 1962 or sixteen between 1965 and 1973.

Are you thinking of a combined Championship/L1 or are you including Superleague too?

[jamescolin]

I meant one league for all teams. An 8 team play off would give a good few a chance of progress. OK so I am going back a long way but the new format is daft, lots of teams would suffer and only the top ones would benefit. At 91 I have seen lots of ups and downs and quite a number of the hierarchy are only interested in what benefits them.

[Griff]

Just now, jamescolin said:

I meant one league for all teams. An 8 team play off would give a good few a chance of progress. OK so I am going back a long way but the new format is daft, lots of teams would suffer and only the top ones would benefit. At 91 I have seen lots of ups and downs and quite a number of the hierarchy are only interested in what benefits them.

Not going to happen.  If only because of the TV contract.

[Ackroman]

5 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Just little things like only 1 or 2 match's per month

season started on 23/Feb. and ends on 7/Sept prior to play offs - During this we will only have 18 matches [9 home games] - during this period we will have had 11 blank weeks, ELEVEN blank weeks THEREFORE almost 3 months of blank weeks.

Absolutely. When clubs in SL need at least 13 home matches, where's the logic in thinking you can run a league 1 club on 2/3 of that? Stadiums still need maintenance, insurance, ground staff etc. And how can you attract players from the championship when they get paid to play per game in the same way? Immediately a player in the championship will have had 6 more games to earn a living this season. It's not rocket science. 

[Griff]

11 hours ago, Ackroman said:

Absolutely. When clubs in SL need at least 13 home matches, where's the logic in thinking you can run a league 1 club on 2/3 of that? Stadiums still need maintenance, insurance, ground staff etc. And how can you attract players from the championship when they get paid to play per game in the same way? Immediately a player in the championship will have had 6 more games to earn a living this season. It's not rocket science. 

How many clubs own their own ground?

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

23 minutes ago, Griff said:

How many clubs own their own ground?

You need to be more specific.  Does that include instances were the ground is owned by the man who owns the club but not directly by the club itself? 

[Wakefield Ram]

16 hours ago, Griff said:

How many of those were down to Cornwall dropping out, bye weeks set when there were 11 teams in the comp or the team failing to win cup ties ?

1 or 2 down to Cornwall. If you're suggesting that 20 league games is the fault of the L1 clubs, then why are SL clubs desperate to get 26 and scrape a few more away fans?

[HurricanesSC]

Surprised I haven't seen the idea of a 21-team league where all the teams just play each other once (i.e. for a 20-game season) with a top (7?) play-off? 

Would avoid the issues of odd numbers of teams for each conference and would still provide 10 home games plus any home 1895 Cup/Challenge Cup fixtures. Only negative (besides the risk of blowouts) is the fact you'd have a lottery of home/away games that some fans might say would influence results/finances. 

Personally I think the conference idea is horrible and having multiple groups of 7 etc. would be even worse. 

[dkw]

I'm sure we will find out the structure and funding levels with ample time for clubs to sort things out....

Nah, not really, the clown show now running the place will likely tell the clubs about 3 weeks before the league starts. 

[THE RED ROOSTER]

There are a lot of assumpotions being made on this thread about the make up of Super League 2026. My question is where would London Broncos fit in with the East - West structure?

In the past London has been viewed as part of Lancashire for representative purposes (e.g.Dom Peters playing for Lancashire in the short lived Roses matches of the early 2000's). But looking at the split on a map the Eastern Conference looks more likely than the west.

Equally if Toulouse is black-balled for Super League it does not naturally follow that they would pull out of the league so assuming they did stay -where would they fit?

[Expatknight]

14 minutes ago, dkw said:

I'm sure we will find out the structure and funding levels with ample time for clubs to sort things out....

Nah, not really, the clown show now running the place will likely tell the clubs about 3 weeks before the league starts. 

More than enough time to build a squad and get everything else in place including the administration, sponsorship etc.  sadly and all joking aside you might not be far off, unless, of course, all the ones who need to know already know what the outcome of the independent panel ( which hasn’t been formed yet) will be. Talk about lunatics running the asylum!

Edited August 3 by Expatknight

[Griff]

1 hour ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

You need to be more specific.  Does that include instances were the ground is owned by the man who owns the club but not directly by the club itself? 

Feel free to add subcategories.

[Ackroman]

2 hours ago, Griff said:

How many clubs own their own ground?

 Teams still need to play in one, and pay for it's upkeep and as you will be aware, not owning one can even more expensive and/or problematic.

[Snowys Backside]

Done something like this before with a huge League and in some cases each team not playing everyone. 
 

Could easily play your ‘local teams’ twice then play the other group once to make it in the region of nearly 30 games. 

Deffo a top 8 required, but for what ? Consideration for a SL place ?  Promotion ? Well done, pat on the back ?  
 

That’s what needs sorting out. What are the teams playing for ? 

[Phil W]

Re the comments on Newcastle. I've heard nothing to say that there's even a consideration of us not being involved in a new look Championship. Think most people thought we would've folded by now after our re-launch but we're still here! 

One thing's for sure In an expanded Championship I think the existing Championship clubs will be looking at reduced funding as there's no extra money to go round from what I can see.

The other thing is I hope there's a quick decision on all of this as clubs and supporters deserve to know. This is no way to run a sport, unless you want to run it into the ground! 

[Expatknight]

1 hour ago, Phil W said:

Re the comments on Newcastle. I've heard nothing to say that there's even a consideration of us not being involved in a new look Championship. Think most people thought we would've folded by now after our re-launch but we're still here! 

One thing's for sure In an expanded Championship I think the existing Championship clubs will be looking at reduced funding as there's no extra money to go round from what I can see.

The other thing is I hope there's a quick decision on all of this as clubs and supporters deserve to know. This is no way to run a sport, unless you want to run it into the ground! 

Pretty fair assessment!

[Derwent Parker]

2 hours ago, Snowys Backside said:

Done something like this before with a huge League and in some cases each team not playing everyone. 
 

Could easily play your ‘local teams’ twice then play the other group once to make it in the region of nearly 30 games. 

Deffo a top 8 required, but for what ? Consideration for a SL place ?  Promotion ? Well done, pat on the back ?  
 

That’s what needs sorting out. What are the teams playing for ? 

Just been on google to check about huge leagues found 1971/2 which had all 30 teams playing 34 game season [not counting any comps] , so obviously did not play everyone home and away so shows it can be done.

have not found fixtures yet - but i did find a write up which was interesting and proves nothing as really changed in RL as they are all arguing just like now, two paragraphs stood out

One of the main troubles in Rugby League is that clubs are too ready to try and outsmart each other instead of co-operating'. Twenty-six chairmen turned up and decided the game should be run by an executive of five to seven members instead of the Council.

The vote was 26-3. Alf Drewry (Yorkshire Post) wrote, The League is rapidly qualifying for a new motto. Try anything - but not for long'.

History_of_RL_1971_72.pdf

Edited August 3 by Derwent Parker

[Ackroman]

1 hour ago, Phil W said:

Re the comments on Newcastle. I've heard nothing to say that there's even a consideration of us not being involved in a new look Championship. Think most people thought we would've folded by now after our re-launch but we're still here! 

One thing's for sure In an expanded Championship I think the existing Championship clubs will be looking at reduced funding as there's no extra money to go round from what I can see.

The other thing is I hope there's a quick decision on all of this as clubs and supporters deserve to know. This is no way to run a sport, unless you want to run it into the ground! 

I want to see Newcastle thrive. If York get into SL, we may see them steadily improve as the catchment receives better attention. Junior clubs like Yarm and Catterick are well placed in North Yorks, plus the Cram Rockets, etc around the Tyne. With more money comes more opportunities to develop the kids. This whole tie up will hopefully be the blue print for expansion from now on.

[Gooleboy]

5 hours ago, dkw said:

I'm sure we will find out the structure and funding levels with ample time for clubs to sort things out....

Nah, not really, the clown show now running the place will likely tell the clubs about 3 weeks before the league starts. 

3 weeks!! You are being optimistic there.

[Snowys Backside]

40 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Just been on google to check about huge leagues found 1971/2 which had all 30 teams playing 34 game season [not counting any comps] , so obviously did not play everyone home and away so shows it can be done.

have not found fixtures yet - but i did find a write up which was interesting and proves nothing as really changed in RL as they are all arguing just like now, two paragraphs stood out

One of the main troubles in Rugby League is that clubs are too ready to try and outsmart each other instead of co-operating'. Twenty-six chairmen turned up and decided the game should be run by an executive of five to seven members instead of the Council.

The vote was 26-3. Alf Drewry (Yorkshire Post) wrote, The League is rapidly qualifying for a new motto. Try anything - but not for long'.

History_of_RL_1971_72.pdf

87-88 season

20 teams in the division yet only 28 league games played

Fans on here would be having kittens if that happened in today’s game with some teams not even playing each other. 
 

3 up and 3 down !

[Click]

8 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

There are a lot of assumpotions being made on this thread about the make up of Super League 2026. My question is where would London Broncos fit in with the East - West structure?

In the past London has been viewed as part of Lancashire for representative purposes (e.g.Dom Peters playing for Lancashire in the short lived Roses matches of the early 2000's). But looking at the split on a map the Eastern Conference looks more likely than the west.

Equally if Toulouse is black-balled for Super League it does not naturally follow that they would pull out of the league so assuming they did stay -where would they fit?

To be fair - I think a lot of these assumptions of the make up of Super League 2026 has London involved somewhere, so we wouldn't really be part of the East - West structure for the Championship.

But yes, historically I guess we are more linked to Lancashire - our juniors have represented Lanchasire as academy level in WOTR over more recent years then going back to the early 2000s also.

But yes there are lots of just guess work - and assumptions everywhere, it's what happens when such a lack of communication has come from the top.

[Derwent Parker]

46 minutes ago, Click said:

To be fair - I think a lot of these assumptions of the make up of Super League 2026 has London involved somewhere, so we wouldn't really be part of the East - West structure for the Championship.

But yes, historically I guess we are more linked to Lancashire - our juniors have represented Lanchasire as academy level in WOTR over more recent years then going back to the early 2000s also.

But yes there are lots of just guess work - and assumptions everywhere, it's what happens when such a lack of communication has come from the top.

got to remember though - it is still mathematically possible [but highly unlikely] that London could be in L1 - that will definitely look very dodgy to handpick London for SL from L1

[LeeF]

44 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

got to remember though - it is still mathematically possible [but highly unlikely] that London could be in L1 - that will definitely look very dodgy to handpick London for SL from L1

In the scheme of current dodgy things London being “promoted” from a L1 place is not even in the top 5